Page 48 - Demo

200 CHAPTER 6 %u2022 The Federal JudiciaryThe Decision to Take Cases on AppealIn exercising its appellate jurisdiction, the Supreme Court is confronted with two questions. First, the Court decides whether or not to hear a case. Second, if it does decide to hear the case, it issues its decision based on the merits of the case and applicable law. Almost all of the cases heard on appeal in the Court originate when a litigant who has lost in a lower court files a petition to have their appeal heard. Under Chief Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court receives, on average, between eight thousand and nine thousand petitions a year but hears less than 1 percent (about eighty to ninety) of these cases. Figure 6.5shows the percentage of cases filed with the Supreme Court that have been heard by the justices in oral argument.The Constitution offers little guidance about which cases the Court should take, so justices have adopted the rule of four, which simply means that it will generally hear a case if four or more justices vote to do so. Refer to Figure 6.4, point 4. If it decides to hear a case, the Court issues a writ of certiorari (from the Latin %u201cto be more informed%u201d) to the lower court, requesting the records of the case, a process that is commonly referred to as %u201cgranting cert.%u201d As stated in the rules of the Court, %u201cReview on a writ of certiorari is not a matter of right, but of judicial discretion. A petition of a writ of certiorari will be granted only for compelling reasons.%u201d67 Refer to Figure 6.4, point 5. In cases that are not accepted by the Supreme Court, the decision of the last court that heard the cases remains in place.The Court will often grant cert in cases where lower-level federal courts or state supreme courts issued holdings based on different interpretations of a law or previous court decision. Cases presenting a question involving the Constitution, a federal law, or a treaty are also more likely to be heard.Supreme Court decisions set a precedent, a judicial decision that acts as a basis for deciding similar cases in the future. An individual justice may be more inclined to vote to grant cert if the outcome of the case is likely to create a precedent that the justice supports. Under the principle of stare decisis, the Supreme Court may avoid creating a new precedent by deciding that a previous decision should stand. Stare decisis%u2014the doctrine that judges should follow precedent when considering cases that have similar facts to cases previously decided%u2014facilitates consistency and predictability in the legal system.precedenta judicial decision that guides future courts in handling similar cases.stare decisisthe practice of letting a previous legal decision stand.FIGURE 6.5Productivity of the Supreme Court Under Each Chief Justice0FullerWaiteWhiteTaftHughesStoneVinsonWarrenBurgerRehnquistRoberts*5 10 15 20 25 30 35 4038.5834.4033.1723.3616.5713.528.575.543.661.650.94Percentage of cases %u0013led that have led to oral arguments*As of June 2022Data from empiricalscotus.com.%u00a9 Bedford, Freeman & Worth Publishers. For review purposes only. Do not distribute.